Rejected appeal today

Coupon-mad

And we are not telling you to ignore them all. Obviously you can ignore ZZPS and GCTT letters though.

My advice was that you handle this for him (in his name, not yours!) but protect him from seeing the letters.

There is nothing to worry about. Hook the letters to your house and respond to one 'as Dad' so they know the address is correct. 

panyg

Hi,

My dad finally got a reply after 3 weeks to an email about asking for consideration due to having a blue badge.

They replied:

"Whilst we appreciate that you forgot to display a permit and thought it was ok to park with a virtual companion badge, the notice has been issued correctly as a valid permit was not displayed and this is completely separate to a virtual companion badge.

The balance currently stands at £100 now to resolve. In the absence of payment this case will continue to progress"

The email I sent them received an auto reply saying:

"Please be assured, you will not be asked to pay a charge at a higher rate due to any delay on our part, and will always be given the opportunity to settle it at the rate it was at on receipt of your email."

So they are now trying to cheat us out of another £40 even though they clearly state it would not be affected by delays.

I am writing back that I am now covering this for my parents, I am disgusted they are forcing pensioners to pay when they had a blue badge and also that they are trying to cheat my parents out of another £40 when it says the rate shouldn't increase.

I was going to mention ZZPS why they are misleading him by claiming that the signage is "the British Parking Association approved" when Wing are not in the BPA AOS but I just checked and ZZPS are in the BPA Approved Operators list. How does that work with Wing Parking? As Grandad1505 said, the websites states:

"With effect from 1 January 2023, Wing Parking is not currently supplying any active on-site parking enforcement service. 

If after 1 January 2023 you have received a Parking Charge Notice, or a Penalty Charge Notice, on a site that we managed prior to then, then it is not a Notice issued by us and we cannot assist you with any enquiry relating to either the Notice, or the overall parking controls in operation after 1 January 2023. "

Does the signage complaint still stand? Also, can I complain to BPA AOS as ZZPS are members?

Sorry for all the questions and thanks for any help.

B789

panyg said:

The email I sent them received an auto reply saying:

"Please be assured, you will not be asked to pay a charge at a higher rate due to any delay on our part, and will always be given the opportunity to settle it at the rate it was at on receipt of your email."

@panyg Why are you even responding to them when you've already been advised not to? The only thing you need to respond to from now on is if you ever receive a Letter of Claim or Letter Before County Court Claim for a law firm acting on behalf of the PPC or from the PPC themselves.

Ignore anything else unless it is a LoC or LBCC. There is no point in trying to beg to be let off for mitigating circumstances. The PPC are nothing but a scam outfit who are after your money. Your (on your dads behalf) circumstances are no different from the vast majority of posters on here. This, should it ever progress to a court claim is winnable. 

Having looked at the picture of the terms sign, I cannot see any company named. There are some stickers about Haringey but nowhere on that sign does it state who you are entering into contract with. You cannot form a contract if you don't know who you are dealing with. So, whilst the main argument that would have guaranteed in defeating this has been blown due to identifying the driver, at least the signage issue is almost as good for getting this thrown out.

panyg

B789 said:

@panyg Why are you even responding to them when you've already been advised not to?
My apologies, I thought I was advised to reply that I was dealing with it instead now on.

My concerns were that ZZPS are showing as members of BPA so I wondered if it was worth complaining as they are trying to cheat us out of extra money by increasing to £100 when they said they would keep the price. The guide does mention complaining to BPA about their members.

B789 said:

Having looked at the picture of the terms sign, I cannot see any company named.

It says "Managed by Wing Security LTD" at the bottom.

So I don't reply at all and wait for a Letter of Claim or Letter Before County Court Claim for a law firm acting on behalf of the PPC or from the PPC themselves?

Sorry for the questions again. If it was addressed to me, it would be another matter.

B789

panyg said:
It says "Managed by Wing Security LTD" at the bottom.

Do you man this?:



How on earth can anyone notice that? Also there is no other information other than the name. Where are their contact details or an address?

So I don't reply at all and wait for a Letter of Claim or Letter Before County Court Claim for a law firm acting on behalf of the PPC or from the PPC themselves?

Yes. With a shambles of a sign like that I doubt they will ever take it to court but if they do decide to do so, they can file a claim any time up to 6 years after the event. Just keep all the paperwork.

panyg

B789 said:

panyg said:
It says "Managed by Wing Security LTD" at the bottom.

Do you man this?:



How on earth can anyone notice that? Also there is no other information other than the name. Where are their contact details or an address?

I really don't know

I was responding as you said there was no company name and that effects their case. You mentioned "nowhere on that sign does it state who you are entering into contract with. You cannot form a contract if you don't know who you are dealing with". My apologies but I felt that was a relevant reply.

B789

Hopefully you can do as advised by @Coupon-mad and get any letters from the scum that send the threats but are toothless, directed to your address so that your elderly parents aren't bothered by them.

From now, all you need to respond to is if/when you receive and actual LoC or LBCCC. When that happens, come back here and let us know so you can get the best advice.

Coupon-mad

Like I said, you all seem to be panicking and I say you really should have provided Dad's 'new address' as your own, to stop the family getting in a tizz about nothing.  I did already advise you:

Obviously you can ignore ZZPS and GCTT letters though.

This is only Wing Parking (an unregulated chancer) and the driver could have ignored that windscreen PCN completely.  Wing are not in a Trade Body and couldn't have got his data.  At al!  Stop thinking your Dad has to respond.  That was their downfall in the first place!

Wing are also unlikely to sue.

TonyD99

Hi, I’m not gonna hijack this thread with my PCN details, but thought I’d add some info that may help people regarding wing/ZZPS etc and this persons issues.

wing parking limited (07469549) used to do haringey councils parking up until 31/12/22 but wing security limited (04389731) have started as of 1/1/23 and the phone number and address on the pcn’s are actually for ZZPS!

A director for wing parking resigned in nov/22 and is the director of wing security, they both used to have the same registered Luton address until last year when wing security changed to Milton Keynes and then to central london.
I’ve spoke to multiple people at haringey council and they all believe wing parking and wing security are the same company too and gave me wing security’s number which is the ZZPS number from the PCN, I’m trying to speak to someone higher up to explain that it looks like ZZPS are dealing with the pcn’s and even though they are bpa registered, surely they can’t request keeper details as they haven’t got the landlords (haringey) permission and any ‘contractual law’ agreement to park is with wing security and not ZZPS.
the website to pay or appeal on the PCN is www.ipaymypcn.net.
the only info I can’t find online regarding wing security is a companies house link which also states that they’re a dormant company too, just don’t mistake them for ‘wing.security’ which is a totally different company.

hope this helps anyone and it would be interesting to hear any feedback about this.

Coupon-mad

Very interesting, @TonyD99

Wing (either iteration) can't get DVLA data if they are not in the BPA or the IPC AOS and because of that, ZZPS can't lawfully get it for them either.

Ask Haringey if they realise they are using an unregulated agent which can only put flyers on cars and can't use the DVLA keeper database. 

I think Wing (old version) had a system of permits where they got applicants to fill in all sorts of details including stating who the registered keeper of the car was, before Wing would give them a permit.

Then Wing used that info to chase up PCNs issued to permit-holders.  They had no option because they left the BPA ages ago.

That means Wing could chase permit holders - if they had those old details - but could NEVER chase trespassers (unknown vehicles).

it doesn't take a genius to realise this is the opposite of the purpose of parking management that I am sure Haringey really want and intend.

It means that you and I, and uncle Tim Cobley and all, could park in any Wing Car Park without any concerns.  Could dump our cars there for a week and go on holiday despite not being a tenant.

Can you point that absurd position out to Haringey?  Do they really want an unregulated parking agent with unapproved signs who are unable to access the DVLA database and are completely powerless to prevent/deter or even write to allegedly trespassing motorists?

Are they mad?

Are they seriously happy to let this farce continue despite the fact the Government is regulating the parking industry to improve standards, and their agent (in isolation) resigned from the BPA AOS two years ago, and has actively chosen to stay out of any Approved Operator scheme and thus avoid regulation.

Did Wing tell them they aren't complying with ANY code of practice and haven't done for 2 years, and have been powerless to obtain DVLA data? Aren't they at all concerned that they are the ONLY borough whose residential car parks will not have to meet the requirements of the 2024 new statutory Code of Practice (or any best practice rules at all) because their agent has gone 'rogue' by not being regulated?

Would they like this in the Daily Mail?  I am sure Tony Hetherington of ThisIsMoney would be interested...